joaorj

Obviously it would be AI-complete. I didn't know that term, that's what I meant by currently impossible to code. I just learned my favorite term ever, thanks for that!.

Although disappointing, you seem to have the correct answer for my question.

Nice insight you brought with the CPU and the standard libraries being a relevant factor, hadn't thought of that.

Your thought experiment sounds more like a "codec" than a procedural generation. I guess it is an arbitrary line given that we are using CPU, etc. But the bigger the decompressing "model" the further away from true 4k compression we are.

That being said, speech is far from the best compression we can ever hope of achieving.

I suspect that if at all possible to have an algorithm that can generate the seeds plus the process to expand them, then that algorithm would take orders of magnitude longer to run then there would be practical in any meaningful time scale.

Sorry, I thought it was obvious, but the question is: Could procedural generation be used to achieve amazing compression rates given a currently impossible to code algorithm?

Does this mean that lots of 3:30 minutes 1080p videos could be compressed into 4kb?

EDIT: We can be generous and say 40kb for sake of adding more colours / etc.

I hate geoblocking, but looking trough the site I only felt like facepalm. It's the same as poverty sucks so let's give 1000$ a month to everybody and somehow where the money will come from will be figured out by someone.

I don't think it makes sense to force business plans on companies.

You went from incredible predictable to better than random? Wow, now that's impressive!

If that were the case their society would soon collapse after a few years.

The cost of every square foot of living space in x years is something we can't have the smallest idea about.

I agree that condition B should be discarded. It doesn't seem likely that Satoshi would want to trash Andersen in the process.

At first glance I think they would take off and be airborne. Other than that they would do whatever they were programmed to do. I know, my comment is stupid, thought I should fit in.

Maybe we can use this comment as a place to give our best guesses for to the percentage of liars on the internet.

How many of the people claiming to have clicked a button few minutes / hours after it was out and having spectacular irreversible consequences to their lives is just a phony?

I would say between 40% and 90%, but don't know better than that.

Yeah, that's definitely a possibility. What you describe is more or less the basic property/side effect I was talking about, but much better explained.

You're betting evolution is not that good. One can also bet it better than you can possibly imagine. I don't think you can be sure either way at this point, but your argument seems to be the most compelling at this point!